Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

In what really isn't news anymore, yet another GOP family values consultant is arrested for filming little boys "hundreds of times"

http://www.rawstory.com/2015/11/georgia ... s-lawsuit/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Can somebody here please explain why there are never any women in GOP sex scandals?

Baldy, you're from Georgia, whats up with all the conks fvcking little boys down there?

houndawg wrote:
Can somebody here please explain why there are never any women in GOP sex scandals?

I'm guessing it's somewhat related to the little boys thing.

CAA Flagship wrote:

houndawg wrote:
Can somebody here please explain why there are never any women in GOP sex scandals?

I'm guessing it's somewhat related to the little boys thing.

But where does the aversion to pussy come from? Is it a sour grapes thing because women won't interact with them unless they get paid, i.e., "we never wanted no pussy anyway"? Or do they just prefer to fvck little boys because they're "tighter down there"?

houndawg wrote:

CAA Flagship wrote: I'm guessing it's somewhat related to the little boys thing.

But where does the aversion to pussy come from? Is it a sour grapes thing because women won't interact with them unless they get paid, i.e., "we never wanted no pussy anyway"? Or do they just prefer to fvck little boys because they're "tighter down there"?

It's Genetics. Just about 100%, because Environment does not endorse it.

CAA Flagship wrote:

houndawg wrote:
But where does the aversion to pussy come from? Is it a sour grapes thing because women won't interact with them unless they get paid, i.e., "we never wanted no pussy anyway"? Or do they just prefer to fvck little boys because they're "tighter down there"?

It's Genetics. Just about 100%, because Environment does not endorse it.

So you're saying the same gene that makes you want to fvck little boys is also the one that makes you hang Republican?

houndawg wrote:In what really isn't news anymore, yet another GOP family values consultant is arrested for filming little boys "hundreds of times"

http://www.rawstory.com/2015/11/georgia ... s-lawsuit/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Can somebody here please explain why there are never any women in GOP sex scandals?

Baldy, you're from Georgia, whats up with all the conks fvcking little boys down there?

Never?

It's got to be a Climate Change thing.

Ibanez wrote:

houndawg wrote:In what really isn't news anymore, yet another GOP family values consultant is arrested for filming little boys "hundreds of times"

http://www.rawstory.com/2015/11/georgia ... s-lawsuit/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Can somebody here please explain why there are never any women in GOP sex scandals?

Baldy, you're from Georgia, whats up with all the conks fvcking little boys down there?

Never?

houndawg wrote:

CAA Flagship wrote: It's Genetics. Just about 100%, because Environment does not endorse it.

So you're saying the same gene that makes you want to fvck little boys is also the one that makes you hang Republican?

No. It's the same gene that makes one a fan of the Dallas Cowboys.

houndawg wrote:In what really isn't news anymore, yet another GOP family values consultant is arrested for filming little boys "hundreds of times"

http://www.rawstory.com/2015/11/georgia ... s-lawsuit/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Can somebody here please explain why there are never any women in GOP sex scandals?

Baldy, you're from Georgia, whats up with all the conks fvcking little boys down there?

All the Conks?

That thirst knows no political bounds, Gramps...

For every Jim Collins you have a Terry Bean or a Carl McGee or a Jeffrey Epstein.

CAA Flagship wrote:

houndawg wrote:
So you're saying the same gene that makes you want to fvck little boys is also the one that makes you hang Republican?

No. It's the same gene that makes one a fan of the Dallas Cowboys.

houndawg wrote:

CAA Flagship wrote: No. It's the same gene that makes one a fan of the Dallas Cowboys.

The Flag is one funny son-of-a-bitch

WOW.

Surely, a BAD day for the Conks........

I'll preface things by saying that at this point these are allegations.

However if it proves out there's a homosexuality issue here too Liberals need to come to grips with that. The paradigm has been to say it's pedophilia and not homosexuality. Same thing with the Catholic Priest stuff.

But it's homosexuality. Homosexuality is a factor. And it has ramifications for things like asking whether or not homosexuals should be allowed to be adult boy scout leaders. That kind of thing. LIberals don't like to deal with that. But it does.

Grizalltheway wrote:

Not at all. If it proves out what you have here is a homosexual who embedded himself in a religious institution to exploit the situation. Very similar to what happened with the Catholic Priest thing.

Liberals insist on being in denial about homosexuality being a factor. But it's a factor.

The tendency is to focus on the "GOP consultant" thing. But we also have a "wolf in sheep's clothing" homosexual thing.

When my children were young I frequently told my wife I didn't want them trusted to church youth type things because I felt such environments obviously attract predators. I think there are plenty of people who become affiliated with churches because it gives them easy prey. Not to say that most people affiliated with churches aren't sincere. But to me the situation is pretty obviously such that it's a great environment for, for example, a homosexual who wants to dilly dally with young boys to have that opportunity.

JohnStOnge wrote:I'll preface things by saying that at this point these are allegations.

However if it proves out there's a homosexuality issue here too Liberals need to come to grips with that. The paradigm has been to say it's pedophilia and not homosexuality. Same thing with the Catholic Priest stuff.

But it's homosexuality. Homosexuality is a factor. And it has ramifications for things like asking whether or not homosexuals should be allowed to be adult boy scout leaders. That kind of thing. LIberals don't like to deal with that. But it does.

So if it were 11 year old girls, you'd blame it on sexuality?

So if it were 11 year old girls, you'd blame it on sexuality?

Yes. It would be a predator who embeds himself into a situation where he can do that. But I don't think it would be as easy. I think that Churches tend to trust males dealing with young females less than they trust males dealing with young males.

Another thing: My perception is that in the majority of instances this kind of thing involves adult males exploiting juvenile males. I think that in the majority of instances there is a homosexual element. That is certainly the case with respect to the thing with Catholic Priests.

I mean he falls into the trap every time.

kalm wrote:

JohnStOnge wrote:I'll preface things by saying that at this point these are allegations.

However if it proves out there's a homosexuality issue here too Liberals need to come to grips with that. The paradigm has been to say it's pedophilia and not homosexuality. Same thing with the Catholic Priest stuff.

But it's homosexuality. Homosexuality is a factor. And it has ramifications for things like asking whether or not homosexuals should be allowed to be adult boy scout leaders. That kind of thing. LIberals don't like to deal with that. But it does.

So if it were 11 year old girls, you'd blame it on sexuality?

Try to keep up. We covered this already. The blame is on the Dallas Cowboys.

CAA Flagship wrote: Try to keep up. We covered this already. The blame is on the Dallas Cowboys.

It never stops being funny...

JohnStOnge wrote:

Grizalltheway wrote:

Not at all. If it proves out what you have here is a homosexual who embedded himself in a religious institution to exploit the situation. Very similar to what happened with the Catholic Priest thing.

Liberals insist on being in denial about homosexuality being a factor. But it's a factor.

The tendency is to focus on the "GOP consultant" thing. But we also have a "wolf in sheep's clothing" homosexual thing.

When my children were young I frequently told my wife I didn't want them trusted to church youth type things because I felt such environments obviously attract predators. I think there are plenty of people who become affiliated with churches because it gives them easy prey. Not to say that most people affiliated with churches aren't sincere. But to me the situation is pretty obviously such that it's a great environment for, for example, a homosexual who wants to dilly dally with young boys to have that opportunity.

Once again you blather reflexively all around, but not to, the point. Which is why do so many of these freaks wind up working for the GOP? Obviously it isn't homosexuality since the GOP doesn't tolerate folk of that persuasion. Which is a bit of a secondary issue - why is it OK in the GOP's mind to fvck little boys but not grown up ones? How old does a boy have to be before the the GOP no longer considers it acceptable? Can they get a waiver to continue if the boy grows up and enrolls at the citadel?

houndawg wrote:

Once again you blather reflexively all around, but not to, the point. Which is why do so many of these freaks wind up working for the GOP? Obviously it isn't homosexuality since the GOP doesn't tolerate folk of that persuasion. Which is a bit of a secondary issue - why is it OK in the GOP's mind to fvck little boys but not grown up ones? How old does a boy have to be before the the GOP no longer considers it acceptable? Can they get a waiver to continue if the boy grows up and enrolls at the citadel?

Whoa... there Mr.
I'm the Citadel basher on this forum - did you check with me before you posted this
(Answer: No you did not)

Breach in forum protocol

Pedophiles are not gay or straight.

Should you be blamed, JSO, for all the pedos that like little girls (95% of them).

Of course, in YOUR world, that is acceptable and natural.

houndawg wrote:

JohnStOnge wrote:
Not at all. If it proves out what you have here is a homosexual who embedded himself in a religious institution to exploit the situation. Very similar to what happened with the Catholic Priest thing.

Liberals insist on being in denial about homosexuality being a factor. But it's a factor.

The tendency is to focus on the "GOP consultant" thing. But we also have a "wolf in sheep's clothing" homosexual thing.

When my children were young I frequently told my wife I didn't want them trusted to church youth type things because I felt such environments obviously attract predators. I think there are plenty of people who become affiliated with churches because it gives them easy prey. Not to say that most people affiliated with churches aren't sincere. But to me the situation is pretty obviously such that it's a great environment for, for example, a homosexual who wants to dilly dally with young boys to have that opportunity.

Once again you blather reflexively all around, but not to, the point. Which is why do so many of these freaks wind up working for the GOP? Obviously it isn't homosexuality since the GOP doesn't tolerate folk of that persuasion. Which is a bit of a secondary issue - why is it OK in the GOP's mind to fvck little boys but not grown up ones? How old does a boy have to be before the the GOP no longer considers it acceptable? Can they get a waiver to continue if the boy grows up and enrolls at the citadel?

Because they want to do the right thing like most Conks, so they hide it. If they didn't give a shit and wanted support for their action, they would be a Donk.

Simple.